Has Airbnb made a branding “balls-up”?

After the grave subject-matter of my previous post, I thought it would be fun to turn my attention to a lighter story. Lighter though it may be, it’s still a fascinating branding, marketing and PR case-study and a source of serious consideration, once you’ve stopped sniggering.

It concerns last week’s launch of Airbnb’s new branding. The popular holiday-apartment-rental website revealed a radical departure from its original light-blue and white script style logo, to a red and white livery with a new insignia. 

Airbnb’s old logo

Problem is, nobody seems to know what the logo stands for,. Techcrunch went as far as describing it as “a Rorschach test for everyone who saw it,” and this very lack of definition is giving rise to some rather mischievous suggestions.

Airbnb’s new logo

So, is it . . .

• An inverted heart?
• Peter Griffin’s (Family Guy) chin?
• A bum
• A pair of breasts?
• A pair of balls, or a vagina?

Amid much hilarity online, Gizmodo proved to be fond of the last suggestion, as was the Valleywag blog on Gawker . A Tumblr site rapidly appeared with a bunch of other recommendations, some more salacious than others.

The designers stressed the new logo’s simplicity to replicate and remember. They call it the Bélo and they’re keen for it to be as ubiquitious as the Wi-Fi symbol. Apparently, according to Airbnb, it combines elements of a person with their arms outstretched, preparing to hug you; a map location marker, a heart and the A from the Airbnb name. It’s supposed to indicate a sense of belonging, and this is to be enhanced with the logo’s ability to be customised by users, according to Airbnb. 

 

Another imaginative suggestion for what the new logo stands for.

So has the brand re-boot been a success, or, in rather apposite Cockney argot, a great big “balls-up”?

This is a difficult one to call, in my opinion. I don’t suppose that the good people at Airbnb anticipated becoming the butt of so many jokes. (I’m sorry, I just couldn’t resist a cheeky pun myself) and certainly they’ve been initially dismayed by the giggles to which they’ve given rise. In the UK, the Daily Mail reported a rather po-faced and peevish defence of the re-branding by Airbnb founder and CTO Nathan Blecharczyk, who said: “It’s just like: Go ahead, laugh all you want, guys. We wouldn’t want to design a logo that caters to the lowest common denominator.” The newspaper even suggested that Airbnb claims the new logo will become as recognizable as the Nike swoosh.

Top marks for ambition, Mr. Blecharczyk and team. Thing is, it would be all too easy to be dismissive of them except for a couple of important considerations. First, consumers are notoriously bad at handling change. We cling to the familiar. After all, isn’t it always that case that, “they don’t make things like they used to.” Nevertheless, once change happens, we are remarkably adaptable, and before long we’ll forget how things really used to be, unless we’re reminded of them. So the chances are the same thing will happen with this re-branding. 

Secondly, if the top brass at Airbnb play this situation correctly, they could really make it work in their favour. 

I’ve just Googled “new Airbnb logo”. In only 39 seconds, it says it has identified 13,400,000 web search results, and in 22 seconds, 25,900 news results. That’s a fantastic amount of noise for a story about a brand’s new logo and typeface. I hazard a guess that Airbnb would have been hard-pressed to generate this much discussion, PR coverage and brand recognition so rapidly.

This word-of-mouth is something on which Airbnb can build, providing they show a bit of humility and a big sense of humour. Globally, people are talking about Airbnb’s re-branding. Who’d have thunk it? They should embrace the amusement they’re providing, and use the laughs, and the fascination to explain their brand, and show that they’re a fun, transparent, “human” company.

There’s a lesson here. Things might look messy at the beginning, but with the right positioning and attitude, there’s often an opportunity, and a way to make things work. It remains to be seen whether it will in this case.

• What do you think of the logo and the re-branding?
• What does it remind you of?
• Can Airbnb can make it work? How?

I’d love to hear what you think.

Battered Brand: Suarez, Blatter and the face of football

As the fiesta of football that is the 2014 Brazil World Cup sambas into its second scintillating week, it's a good time to reflect on what has been a roller-coaster for the sport.

From a PR and branding perspective, FIFA is presenting us with some fascinating lessons, and the two most obvious controversies offer us delicious food for thought.

While our minds are fixed on an eating analogy, let's consider firstly the Luis Suarez biting incident, or "Bitegate" as I'll call it for short. 

Well, judging by the global reporting and commentary on Bitegate, it seems obvious to everybody outside of Uruguay that our hungry adopted Scouse superstar has brought himself and the game into disrepute. 

What was notable was the speed in which FIFA responded with an expulsion from the tournament, a lengthy ban from the game and a fine. Although the fine was risible when we consider how much Premier League footballers get paid, the swiftness and severity of the expulsion and the ban suggest that the footballing authorities have learned some lessons.

In the past, both national and international footballing federations have proved ponderous in making such decisions, and their lack of decisiveness has damaged the game's reputation. So this fast turnaround is welcome. If some reports are to be believed, the judgement will be contested. That as the case may be, it was understood that if something wasn't done quickly, football's reputation would  have a chunk taken out of it, as well as Chiellini's shoulder.

In this particular case, the product and brand, namely football and FIFA, have been protected from the dissatisfaction and cynicism that consumers (in this case the global football audience, except for Uruguayans) feel when their favoured product and brand demonstrates inaction in a crisis situation. That is what proves unsatisfactory.

Conversely, the ongoing controversy concerning Sepp Blatter, the decision to award Qatar the World Cup competition, and his decision to stand yet again as FIFA president, is threatening to drag football into the mire. Mumblings about self-interest and avarice are fast becoming a chorus of disapproval.

Mr.Blatter seems to be making some serious mistakes for a number of reasons. Firstly, awarding Qatar a summer tournament in the heat of the Arabian desert seems to be wildly impractical, and probably dangerous for players and supporters alike. Secondly, allegations of shocking conditions for the workers building the facilities leave an appalling taste in the mouth, as do allegations of bribery and underhand negotations. Each of these alone would call into question the judgement of a CEO of a normal corporation. Yet Mr.Blatter stubbornly insists on not vacating his throne. It does not inspire confidence, so much so that even Michel Platini at UEFA, himself a master of politicking in the halls of footballing power, has publicly withdrawn his support for Mr.Blatter.

As for the forthcoming leadership vote, it has been widely reported that Mr.Blatter had planned to stand down after his latest tenure, but he has since gone back on his word. So now, many might argue that his word as well as his judgement apparently can't be trusted. Mr.Blatter has begun to resemble a fading monarch or president, clinging to his elevated position without a mandate. This is hugely damaging for FIFA the brand, and for football, the product.

It is understandable that a leader who has enjoyed a long and successful tenure might feel a personal sense of loss at the thought of ending his career, but his recent moves and his insistence on remaining in situ can no longer be considered for the good of the brand and the product.  The lesson here is that when the rot sets in for a leader's reputation, it is tough to stop the rot, and arguably it must be time for a change. It will be fascinating to see whether this will happen, and what the implications will be for FIFA and for football.

What has perhaps saved the situation from worsening is the World Cup competition itself, which has proved so far to be the most open, exciting and absorbing for quite some time. It demonstrates that fundamentally, football the product, is good. It remains to be seen whether the actions of its mandarins will help it on hinder it in the near future.

Meanwhile, on a lighter note, some bright sparks across the world in ad-land have been using the goings-on in Brazil to great effect for their companies and clients.

The fast folk at McDonald's Uruguay didn't mess around after Luis Suarez chomped on Chiellini. It took only a matter of minutes for them to post this on their Twitter feed:

It's a friendly invitation: "Hi Luis Suarez. If you feel hungry, come to take a bit of a BigMac."

Similarly, South African global brand Nando's, make a similar kind invitation.

  

 And in the UK, Mars confectionery didn't miss a trick with their Snickers brand Twitter Feed: 

Proving that with nimble thinking, every crisis for someone can have a positive outcome for someone else. Good work by these brands.